Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

3/30/2011

Referred to House Judiciary

3/30/2011

Referred to House Budget

3/30/2011

Subcommittee Hearings Held.

3/30/2011

Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet.

4/11/2011

Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet Discharged.

4/14/2011

Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

Put on a legislative calendar

4/14/2011

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 32 - 3.

6/01/2011

Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-98, Part I.

6/01/2011

Committee on The Budget discharged.

Put on a legislative calendar

6/01/2011

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 54.

6/21/2011

Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 316 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2021 and H.R. 1249. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate for H.R. 2021 and 80 minutes of general debate for H.R. 1249. The resolution also provides that for H.R. 1249, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule.

6/22/2011

Rule H. Res. 316 passed House.

6/22/2011

Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 316.

6/22/2011

Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2021 and H.R. 1249. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measures will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate for H.R. 2021 and 80 minutes of general debate for H.R. 1249. The resolution also provides that for H.R. 1249, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule.

6/22/2011

House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 316 and Rule XVIII.

6/22/2011

The Speaker designated the Honorable Tom Graves to act as Chairman of the Committee.

6/22/2011

DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with twenty minutes of debate on the question of constitutionality of the measure.

6/22/2011

GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 1249.

6/22/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Smith (TX) amendment.

6/22/2011

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Smith (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Smith (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6/22/2011

Mr. Smith (TX) moved to rise.

6/22/2011

On motion to rise Agreed to by voice vote.

6/22/2011

Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 1249 as unfinished business.

6/23/2011

Considered as unfinished business.

6/23/2011

The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.

6/23/2011

UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced the unfinished business was on the question of adoption of an amendment which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings were postponed.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Conyers amendment no. 2.

6/23/2011

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Conyers amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Conyers demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Baldwin amendment no. 3.

6/23/2011

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Baldwin amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Baldwin demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Moore amendment no. 4.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment no. 5.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Lujan amendment no. 6.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Peters amendment no. 7.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Polis (CO) amendment no. 8.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Conyers amendment no. 9.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Speier amendment no. 10.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Watt amendment no. 11.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Sensenbrenner amendment no. 12.

6/23/2011

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Sensenbrenner amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Sensenbrenner demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Manzullo amendment no. 13.

6/23/2011

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Manzullo amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Manzullo demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Rohrabacher amendment no. 14.

6/23/2011

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Rohrabacher amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Rohrabacher demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provsions of H. Res. 316, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Schock amendment no. 15.

6/23/2011

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Schock amendment, the Chair put t he question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Smith (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6/23/2011

UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on the adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings were postponed.

6/23/2011

The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 1249.

6/23/2011

The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.

6/23/2011

Mr. Miller (NC) moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary.

6/23/2011

DEBATE - The House proceeded with ten minutes of debate on the motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to report the same to the House with an amendment to require the U.S. Patent Office to prioritize patent applications filed by entities that pledge to develop or manufacture their products, processes, and technologies in the U.S., including, specifically, those filed by small businesses and individuals.

6/23/2011

The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.

6/23/2011

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

6/23/2011

The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 1249.

6/23/2011

Mr. Jackson (IL) raised a point of order. Subsequent to the completion of a roll call vote on the Conyers amendment No. 9, the final disposition was called into question and by unanimous consent, the proceedings were vacated and the Conyers amendment No. 9 was redesignated and the question of adoption was put again by the Chair de novo for a re-vote by the Committee of the Whole.

6/23/2011

The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Amendment mandates a United States Patent Trade Office led study with the Small Business Administration on how to better utilize existing government resources for education and technical assistance to help small businesses with international patent protection.

An amendment numbered 11 printed in Part B of House Report 112-111 to add a severability clause protecting the remainder of the bill if the Supreme Court determines that certain sections or provisions are unconstitutional.

Organizations that took a position on
Leahy-Smith America Invents Act: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Amendment 3 to H R 1249

0 organizations supported this amendment

0 organizations opposed this amendment

Need proof?

Includes reported contributions to congressional campaigns of House members in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2011 – December 31, 2012.Contributions data source: OpenSecrets.org